agent/parking operator not responding to template LBC response

Elsa88

Hello

I am facing an incidence for which I have now received Letter before Claim. I followed all forum advice thoroughly and used template response to send the email. However, its nearing 30 days and neither the parking operator nor their agent has responded to my email. Till date in none of their letters they provided any evidence, images, videos, links instead only asked for money. I am worried they will simply ignore my email and send a court order. Shall I chase them for response before 30 days ?

During winter night, there was traffic jam in a cul-de-sac so I just entered an industrial/retail park to make a U-turn. I didnt park in the bays nor did I see any sign lit about the operating hours.

I have done lot of research on this forum and ignored all previous letters. Now I have received LBC. I used template response and told them they have not provided any response form or anything else as per protocal along with the LBC.

If they do not reply to my email or acknowledge, should I chase or wait for court claim ? or do they usually respond to email ?

Thank you

Cristina

Gr1pr

Ignore them and wait for the inevitable N1SDT court claim pack from the CNBC in Northampton using MCOL to arrive in the post in the near future ( its a Money Claim, not a court order. )

Name the private parking company claimant involved and any lawyers

Elsa88

Thanks for your valuable advice

Private parking company: Select Parking Ltd

Their agents are: Credit Investigation Services

Initial charge: £70, increased to £100 and with LBC they claimed £170.

At any stage can they claim more than this amount? I read somewhere that they can even claim £600+ for court fees, legal charges. Is that correct? or maximum I might have to pay is £170?

Best regards

CM

Gr1pr

The original £100 charge is the only invoice that they can take to court via a Money Claim, plus extras like a £50 legal fee, plus court fees, if a judge awarded against you then a typical figure for ONE pcn invoice is around £212

It seems to me that you need to read the official MSE backed article about this topic, plus you should study the 5th and 2nd posts in the newbies sticky thread in announcements near the top of the forum by coupon mad, see the screenshot below, and have a good read of the correct, up to date information about the whole topic

Coupon-mad

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/comment/82120698#Comment_82120698

But CIS never sue anyone.

And of course they can't add hundreds!

You should already know that the risk of losing a parking claim is negligible and the sum (in total) is likely £212 at stake … if you'd read post 2 of NEWBIES PLEASE READ THESE FAQS FIRST.

Read it now.

🙂

Elsa88

Thanks a lot everyone, I have religiously followed all the steps on this forum on what could happen next.

In anticipation , I have prepared para 3 (Rest all 9 para I will use as it is from defense template)

Are these points fine ?

- -

3. The Defendant denies that the alleged parking contravention and/or liability has been established. In particular:

(a) The Notice to Keeper does not specify any “period of parking”. It provides a timestamp, but does not state the period during which the vehicle was parked, nor does it provide entry and exit times from which such a period could reasonably be established. This does not satisfy the requirement in Schedule 4, paragraph 8(2)(a) of the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 to specify the period of parking to which the notice relates. Accordingly, to the extent that the Claimant seeks to rely upon keeper liability under Schedule 4, the Defendant puts the Claimant to strict proof that the statutory requirements have been complied with.

(b) The Claimant has provided no photographic or video evidence establishing the alleged period of parking or demonstrating the circumstances relied upon to establish the alleged breach. In particular, no evidence has been provided demonstrating that the relevant contractual signage was sufficiently visible and legible at the material time, which was during darkness. The Defendant therefore puts the Claimant to strict proof of the alleged breach, including the position, content, prominence and visibility of all signage relied upon.

(c) The Claimant's Letter of Claim was not accompanied by the Reply Form and Information Sheet required by the Pre-Action Protocol for Debt Claims. The Defendant therefore contends that the Claimant failed to comply with the applicable pre-action requirements and deprived the Defendant of the opportunity to properly understand and respond to the claim before proceedings were commenced.

— -

Shall I mention I didn't park in marked bays, only took a U-turn or details like that ?

Many Thanks !

Gr1pr

Until you see what their POC states on any claim form, you cannot decide on a paragraph 3

Save your stories for your future WS, which could be next year, no waffle, no admissions, no explanations, until the right time, which is unlikely to be your defence

Coupon-mad

"Shall I mention I didn't park in marked bays, only took a U-turn or details like that?"

Yes it is completely relevant to a defence but would depend on how the claim is eventually pleaded. Your plans are along the right lines.

However, Select Parking Ltd aren't known to be litigious and the CIS threatograms don't lead to court.

But how many minutes are between their first and last images of your car? Show us those. CCTV, ANPR or a random lurking waster with a phone camera?

Show us the photos and the PCN, both sides.

Car1980

Ignore the pre—action protocols. Nobody cares. You are under no real obligation to reply to a letter before claim, and there is definitely no obligation for them to reply back.

Elsa88

Hello @Coupon-mad, @everyone,

They haven't shared any images, videos or any weblinks as evidence that I can share with you.

• No CCTV, ANPR, Phone camera images has been shown to me.
• Neither Entry nor Exit timestamps are shared.
• At no point they shared evidence of my car or signage lit or visible in dark.

First letter was Notice to Keeper and Sixth letter was Letter before claim. All of these letters only mention one time and not a duration or any evidence. The back side of most of the letters are blank, TNC collections back side has information on how to pay. No other letter or document (Reply form/Information Sheet etc) was accompanied by any of these letter.

also, read on the forum that Select should not have shared my data with CIS. Is there any argument to be made in the 10 para MCOL defence against that ?

Does this help in any way in my defense ?

Letter	Title	Sent by	Amount
1	Notice to Keeper	Select Parking Ltd	100 (reduced to 60 if paid within 14 days)
2	Outstanding Parking Charge	TNC Collections	170
3	Notice of intention to instruct solicitors	TNC Collections	170
4	No Title	Select Parking Ltd	170
5	Final Notice Before Formal Legal proceedings	Credit Investigation Services	170
6	Letter Before Claim	Select Parking Ltd	170

Attaching first letter: Notice to Keeper and last letter: Letter Before Claim.

Thanks a lot!

Coupon-mad

Not sure where you read that a PPC "shouldn't have shared your data with CIS"? They can share data with a DRA.

And you don't have a court claim do you? Highly unlikely from CIS and never heard of Select Parking litigating.